If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

Yet another game we start JJ instead of Curry and yet another time the oposing team is not allowed to get out to a huge lead at the begining of the game. I hope the puts to rest any thoughts that Rick may have had of ever starting Curry again.

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

Do you really think it is because Curry is not in the lineup. I could list 10 factors involved in the "faster starts" and Curry not starting would not make my list.

I would definatly put it in the top 10 in fact I would put it in the top 3. You dont seem to put any weight to the impact it makes on the rest of the team. When Curry starts Jermaine has to do more because they will double off of Curry a lot more than off of JJ. Also Curry can not guard his man. Not that JJ is a great defender but he clearly does a better job than Curry. So since JJ's man is not blowing by him on every play like he is if Curry is in there Jermaine does not have to come over to help out as much.

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

I would definatly put it in the top 10 in fact I would put it in the top 3. You dont seem to put any weight to the impact it makes on the rest of the team. When Curry starts Jermaine has to do more because they will double off of Curry a lot more than off of JJ. Also Curry can not guard his man. Not that JJ is a great defender but he clearly does a better job than Curry. So since JJ's man is not blowing by him on every play like he is if Curry is in there Jermaine does not have to come over to help out as much.

I was not going to say anything.

You're so kind.

As far as Curry v. JJ, I understand all the arguments that you are making, but I don't see much difference in the effect on the team.

I'll be glad in 6 more games when Jax will start, and this debate will end.

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

How can anyone not see the difference of not having Curry out there? The plus/minus numbers (both for this year and past years) back up the fact that he hurts the team far more than any other player. In the three blowout losses, the team with Curry on the bench got outscored by 16 pts/48 min while the team with Curry in got outscored by 32 pts/48 min. Curry as a starter has always been responsible for his teams having slow starts (it happened all the time in Detroit). There's absolutely no reason to defend him (in more ways than one).

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

Of course I'm part of the James Jones bandwagon, so obviously I like him starting.

He can shoot, although like other have said, he needs to shoot more. Also he's a very long defender, but the one problem is that he's not the quickest guy in the world. Nothing against Curry, but he's just out of shape.

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

The second biggest factor is that the coaches actually drew up a game plan for Phoenix. Listen to the quotes on Pacers.com, Jeff admits they weren't prepared the first game and were totally lost out there.

The biggest factor is obvious. Mark Boyle even talked about it in the post game. The change between this game and the last was Scot. He alone is worth a 53-point swing. We're 7-0 when he plays. As Scot himself said, you can't argue with those numbers.

Re: So does this settle the Curry is ok starting question

Well, I thought the "Fred's starting at SF" thing was a load of crap... He always guarded the SG, and Reggie guarded the SF. So if that means he's starting at SG "in place of Reggie" (and Reg slides to the 3), then what do you call that?